In the field of hydrocarbon exploration and production, seismic surveys may be performed to gain an understanding of the depth and structures of subsurface geological formations. A seismic survey may involve using various seismic sources, such as dynamite, “thumper” trucks, air guns, or other noise sources located at the surface of a hydrocarbon bearing field to propagate seismic waves through an underground formation. The propagated waves are reflected through the formation and acquired using various seismic signal receiver devices, for example, geophones, hydrophones, and the like. Seismic-data traces including a record of the sound wave reflections acquired from a three-dimensional (“3D”) seismic survey of the underground formation may be used to identify subsurface geological structures, including faults and other stratigraphic features that trap hydrocarbon and mineral deposits.
Interpretation of such seismic reflection data often involves analyzing multiple volumes of seismic data across multiple 3D seismic surveys to find interrelationships between the different seismic datasets and identify relevant events within the subsurface formation that may affect hydrocarbon exploration and production operations. Seismic interpretation tools are available to facilitate this type of data analysis. However, such tools typically provide a user with only a static view of the seismic data from the multiple 3D surveys. Hence, seismic interpretation using such conventional tools may be difficult in cases where there are gaps in the seismic data being analyzed. Such a data gap may be due to, for example, null or poor quality seismic traces acquired for a corresponding region of the subsurface formation. In such cases, a user may have to manually rearrange and sort through the volumes of seismic data in order to perform the seismic interpretation effectively. This reduces efficiency and the user's overall experience in using the seismic interpretation tools to perform the seismic interpretation.